W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > February 2010

[Bug 8891] New: No change or so-called zero edit proposals

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 17:27:17 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-8891-2486@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

           Summary: No change or so-called zero edit proposals
           Product: HTML WG
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: Macintosh
        OS/Version: Mac System 9.x
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: working group Decision Policy
        AssignedTo: dave.null@w3.org
        ReportedBy: shelleyp@burningbird.net
         QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
                CC: mjs@apple.com, Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com,
                    rubys@intertwingly.net, mike@w3.org

The initial change proposal period should also include a call for "zero-edit"
or no-change proposals, in addition to change proposal.

What has been happening is that when a change proposal is written and submitted
to the group, then, and only then, do the co-chairs ask for alternative or
counter-proposals. This not only is not a step in the Design Process, it
extends the length of time for the decision process another month, or so.

This additional step is not necessary, either. The bug and issue, and
discussions, are more than sufficient to provide a good understanding of what
the change proposal will be about. Those who disagree with the change, and
believe that the existing document text should remain, unchanged, should write
in defense of the proposal at the same time the change proposal is being made. 

In addition, there's nothing preventing others from submitting alternative
proposals at the same time. If the alternatives end up being the same or
similar, than that just strengthens the request for the change, and will aid in
developing a consensus.

Asking that all change proposals--alternative and counter--adhere to the same
proposal time period ensures that all parties have an equal amount of time to
prepare their arguments. It also will help to ensure that issues are resolved
in a timely manner, rather than dragged out for months. 

All parties submitting change proposals will have the same period following the
change proposal period in order to modify their proposals based on discussions. 

There may be instances during the discussion of a change proposal that new
information, or new ideas arise, and the development of these into a change
proposal could lead to amicable resolution. In which case, a secondary call for
a change proposal could occur -- but these should be the exception, not the

Hopefully amicable resolution will occur based on the discussion without the
need for any further change proposal periods. Hopefully having all change
proposals in front of the group at the same time will help in the resolution.

Regardless, a sense of fair play requires that all members get equal amounts of
time to prepare proposals.

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 6 February 2010 17:27:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:10 UTC